"Now that Linux is the most popular free Unix-like operating system, it shouldn't be a surprise that some projects have begun treating non-Linux operating systems as second-class citizens. This isn't out of contempt for the BSDs or OpenSolaris, it's just a matter of limited manpower: if almost all the users of the application have a Linux operating system and if all the core developers are using Linux themselves, it's difficult to keep supporting other operating systems. But sometimes the choice to leave out support for other operating systems is explicitly made, e.g. when the developers want to implement some innovative features that require functionality that is (at least for now) only available in the Linux kernel."

Linux is a technically excellent (or at least very good) system, and it serves as a strong contender against proprietary platforms.

Why should Linux folks care about BSD exactly? This is not meant to sound offensive (though it probably will set off some fires), but the question stands: what's the point of more than one perfectly good system, except the usual argument of "choice is good, competition is good, what if I don't *like* Linux, and what if Linux suddenly dies overnight"?

More importantly, why should we somehow let 40 years old o.s. design principles dictate how Linux should be designed?

Somebody enlighten me. I'm looking for a well-grounded argument for why we must be paranoid about not stepping on anybody's toes and why we should increase the burden of development and hinder innovation by carrying all that legacy baggage.